♦ NY Times op-ed deploys keywords to imply Vice-President Mike Pence and the two Generals: Mattis and Kelly may be Trump underminers

♦ China isn’t taking Trump turning its economy stagnant lying down

♦ Secretary of Transportation head Elaine Chao beneficiary of millions dollars from Communist Chinese through family business ties

The anonymous author of the New York Times op-ed titled: “I Am Part of the Resistance Inside the Trump Administration” published on Sept. 5, is a “she.” That, according to former Trump 2016 campaign advisor Michael Caputo.

Caputo said he was advised by his lawyer not to name the person. He spoke on the controversy on a Buffalo, NY radio show. A political commentator there, Caputo did not offer a name. He did give a strong opinion of who he believes it is, however. You can hear that full interview in the normal video box above.

The Times op-ed created a firestorm in and around Washington, DC when the anti-Trump publication took the highly irregular step of reprinting an outsider’s “opinion-editorial” that trashed the President with no attribution.

This resistor also claimed to be a Senior Official working within the White House and be working with others to selectively thwart the President’s agenda. The op-ed described what could be perceived as violent coup, stating: “So we will do what we can to steer the administration in the right direction until — one way or another — it’s over.”

Caputo believes that, by definition of the story’s attribution of being a “senior official,” it means one of only fifteen people.

This Times op-ed author brags about successfully thwarting the Trump administration’s agenda in the parts where this resistance element disagrees with policy, but says it also does agree with some other things the administration is doing.

To cast a shade of doubt on Vice President Pence, this anonymous writer claims to be “a lodestar for restoring honor.”

Caputo also says that disclosing the true identity of the author could cause a headache to the administration because “she” is tied to a high level person in “another branch of the government.”

From a Washington Times editorial, we may not only have a “she,” but a person who has been compromised by China and has a vested interest to thwart the President’s trade policy and fight back with its human assets in place.

The person he ascribes to the authorship is: 1) a “senior official” who, 2) with her husband highly ranked in “another branch of government,” and 3) a name that everybody knows (another Caputo assertion).

Chao is one who has motive and serious conflict as revealed in the recent Peter Schweitzer book, “Secret Empires” book showing her family’s business, Foremost Group shipping, pocketing of millions of dollars from the Communist Chinese government.

Quoting out of the Schweitzer book, a Washington Times article relates:

“Before Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell married Elaine Chao, currently Secretary of Transportation, he was a harsh China critic. He’s softened to the point where nowadays he, like his China-born wife, is more of an apologist.

“He’s helped China escape human rights abuses trade penalties and attempted to defend it from the consequences of its notorious currency manipulation practices. During this period Sen. McConnell’s net worth has soared, fueled largely by his father-in-law James Chao’s gifting him so many millions.

“James Chao’s business is financially entangled with the Chinese government. Mr. McConnell’s father-in-law and sister-in-law, while American citizens, are active board members on a key sector of China’s military-industrial complex. Being in favor with our Chinese adversary built the family fortune; remaining in favor may send it soaring to higher heights; the thought of losing favor could force a choice between what’s best for personal wealth management and what’s best for America.”

Strategist and WBEN contributor Michael Caputo joining us live this morning: Mike, the New York Times anonymous op-ed piece that they started running yesterday from what they say is a senior trump administration official…

What does this boil down to? Does it sound like a coup to you?

Caputo: Well, any definition of the word coup that you look up… it certainly is an, at least an administrative coup.

The idea that senior members of the Trump administration are withholding papers or doing things to stop the president’s agenda…It’s certainly not treason. That’s a word that too many people are using too often. But certainly it’s a coup and… whenever this person decided to write this op-ed, they should have quit and stood up with courage and with the courage of their convictions.

Unfortunately, we have a coward in the Trump administration senior ranks.

Q: Who does that say you more about?

Does that say more about this person or more about the President and the administration, just the fact that—you know—they have somebody in there who is actively working against them. Shouldn’t they be able to snuff that out within their own ranks?

A: Well, the op-ed author, I don’t think is an unusual… It’s not unusual. I mean, regardless of what she wrote, I can tell you that the Trump administration is filled with people just like her.

And, the problem is that that the people who came into the White House with the President, like Reince Priebus and others who were not committed to his agenda, spent a great deal of time putting people like her in place, so that this person and others can stymie the president’s agenda.

Unfortunately, all those chickens are coming home to roost.

And, as a matter of fact, I can tell you that there are active programs to stop Trump loyalists from joining the administration and to purge Trump loyalists from departments within the president’s administration.

So, her op-ed is really, just from what I consider to be, a symptom of larger problem.

Q: You’ve mentioned “her” and “she” a couple of times. Do we know it’s a woman?

Caputo: I know it’s a woman. I’m kind of cautious. My attorney is trying to keep me from saying her name. But yes, I believe it’s a woman. I believe I know who it is.

And you don’t have to look any further than the departments of this, of this administration who have completely purged all the Trump people from their ranks. That’s the first indication that someone who is not loyal to the President and that path is very clear to the identity.

Q: The president has been very critical of the op-ed, but do you think you think he actually read it?

A: Ah, of course he did! And and if you read closely, by the way, you’ll see it’s very cleverly written. And that’s why the whole parlor game about who she is, is really entertaining.

The op-ed writer, clearly a ghost writer, a very talented writer, it’s very tightly written, very professionally written. And she can’t write op-eds this well.

Q: The reason I ask that question is because in part of that op-ed… in the middle is there a piece on foreign policy. “In public and private (reading from the op-ed) President Trump shows a preference for autocrats and dictators such as Vladimir Putin. Kim Jong-Un displays a little genuine appreciation for the ties that bind to allied, like minded nations”

And this morning, right after his tweets slamming the op-ed is a tweet from an hour ago: ‘Kim Jung Un of North Korea proclaims unwavering faith in President Trump. Thank you chairman Kim.”

I mean, he’s proving the op-ed right there in a Tweet this morning.

A: Well, I can tell you that I don’t expect the President to change his strategy, change his tactics in world affairs just because of a disloyal person in his cabinet. I don’t expect at all! And, if it happened, I would be very disappointed in the president.

The person who wrote this op-ed is arrogant, full of themselves. Sees themselves as Captain America. And you know, I gotta tell ya, eventually she will be found out. But this op-ed writer, above all, is a coward.

Because this has happened before, where, like for example President Clinton’s Administration, when he did welfare reform. A major, a good friend of his and a major member of his cabinet quit and then wrote a very strong words about that policy in his disagreement with it in an op-ed. That’s what a proper person does.

This person is a coward.

Q: What about the Times deciding to run with this with with, you know, with an anonymous person?

A: Well I think, listen, the Times…I have my disagreements with them. But this is a newspaper that published the Pentagon Papers. And they weighed that very carefully. They got lawyers deeply involved. They thought it was important, I think probably a lot more important than this coward’s op-ed.

But the New York Times felt that this is something that was needed to be said. And the fact that it’s coming from a senior administration official gives it some weight. So I don’t blame the New York Times for doing it. They’re certainly gonna make good money off of it.

It’s an important event, I think, in Washington. Yesterday, when it happened, it was like a bomb went off in the city.

It’s proven to be newsworthy and I don’t blame the New York Times for publishing it.

Q: At what point does this go back to the president? All throughout the campaign in 2016, we kept hearing about how tumultuous it was in the campaign, where you had the campaign… people who were on the staff coming and going. And it was kind of wild in there.

Now you have this op-ed painting a similar image and of course all the reports that preceded it of inside the White House.

I mean, at some point, don’t you have to point a finger at the president and say: ‘you know, what kind of ship are you running here?’

A: Brian, stop buying this stuff wholesale. Really, I mean..

Q: Well, you you were one of the people who on this air said it was tumultuous in that campaign and now a similar picture’s being painted of the White House.

A: And of course it was and it’s tumultuous at WBEN. Stand up. I mean, my goodness.

Listen to me when I tell you that this is a coward who has no idea of what really goes on in the White House and the way the President works, I’m telling you the truth. If you don’t believe me, you don’t have to call me. But, here is the deal, OK.

This op-ed was written by a snake.

If you look in there it uses words like “Loadstar,” which sends you directly to Vice President Pence.

And then, it uses words like “off the rails,” which sends you directly to General Kelly.

And then it uses words like “first principles,” which sends you directly to General Mattis.

This person is so cowardly that they drop important words, often used by their colleagues to try to throw the scent off of them.

It’s cowardly.

You know what’s tumultuous? The whole idea of a coward like this writing this op-ed and then hiding and trying to blame others. That is tumultuous.

And I’ll tell you what. There’s agreement on the cowardly nature of this person on the left and the right.

They either need to stand up and be counted or go away.

Q: Michael, leaks are rampant in Washington. How soon are we gonna know who this is?

A: You know, we will find out. I mean, that’s the history of Washington. This person will probably leave the administration soon and take a bow for what she wrote. I think that’s par for the course and part of her really strange personality. But at the end of the day, the New York Times will not reveal who this is.

I think that she has covered her tracks significantly.

It is dangerous to fire her because of who she’s related to. And all of this will come out in the wash.

Q: Do you expect that to happen soon, given that, I mean, you’ve referenced her a number of times? If you already know, somebody else, I’m sure does too.

Yeah, Brian, it’s one thing to identify the person, but it’s another thing to try and prove it and to try and do something about them.

And if this person is related to someone who’s powerful in another branch of the government, then we’re gonna have a real problem getting rid of them, aren’t we?

What we have to do is understand it. This is all about impeachment; this is all about the 2018 mid-term elections.

This person dropped this thing very carefully, very well timed, in order to affect the mid-term elections so that the Trump supporters will stay home, the Democrats will win control of the House and the president will be impeached. That’s what this is all about.

We got to get through the mid-terms and deal with it afterwards.

Q: Is this a name that we’re familiar with?

A: Of course it is. It’s a name that everyone’s familiar with.

I mean, when the New York Times says this is a senior member of the administration, that necessarily means that it is either a deputy secretary-second level of all the departments–or higher. This is not somebody who, let’s say for example, a functionary in the National Security Council. They say: “senior” administration official at the New York Times.

That only is about fifteen people.

Q: Does the president have an inkling who it is then?

A: I’m not quite certain if the president does. I’m doing everything I can to try to inform him.

But, everybody around that I know who understands the nature of the person that wrote this thing, understands exactly who she is. That will eventually be brought into the White House and the President will understand that there’s probably nothing he can do about it.